Sarmad Samad (CPCM-BRASI) (PGD-IBA) (MBA-SZABIST)’s Post

"Tension" over Authority among Iraq's Top courts From Amwaj Media. Any opinions expressed are those of the author(s), and do not necessarily reflect the views of Iraq Business News. Shock ruling indicates tension over authority among Iraq's top courts A judicial crisis has blown open as Iraq's Federal Court of Cassation (FCC) has for the first time overturned a ruling by the Federal Supreme Court (FSC). The contention revolves around a retired judge's compensation package, which has now been deemed unconstitutional. Of further note, the FCC's chief judge has asserted that it holds ultimate authority over all rulings in Iraq. This potentially opens the door for a reassessment of other hot-button verdicts by the Federal Supreme Court which have been accused of being politicized. The full article can be viewed here (registration required).The post "Tension" over Authority among Iraq's Top courts first appeared on Iraq Business News. https://lnkd.in/dde3NC8A AL TEBA Company for Oil Services MB

A very well articulated judgement in which the proposition was the extent of the powers of the Chief Commissioner to detaine someone. The Court discusses the proposition at hand with reference to the relevant legislative history and both Pakistani and foreign caselaw. Even more appreciative was the Court's use of research papers and books on the topic as well, with the full reference cited therein. The Court also referred to some works of literature to enunciate it's rationale as well. The Court ruled that Section 3(1) of the Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance 1960 (MPO) does not provide the Chief Commissioner with the powers to act as a Provincial Government for ICT and that such authority cannot be delegated to the District Magistrate under Section 26, MPO. Thus, the Chief Commissioner cannot issue any order to detain someone as he is not the government itself. The Court also ruled that Section 26, MPO can only be constitutionally valid to the extent of delegating limited authority of exercising only the power to issue an arrest and detention and not to determine whether such order of arrest and detention is to be accepted or rejected. Such power vests only with the Government. Indeed, a very interesting judgement.

Read my latest blog for the Conflict Law Centre!

In South Africa v Israel, the International Court of Justice on 26 January 2024 made an ORDER WITH SIX "PROVISIONAL MEASURES". Measures 2 and 4 have "immediate" effect. Measure 6 requires Israel to "submit a report to the Court on all measures taken to give effect to this Order within one month". A PDF of the full decision can be downloaded here - https://lnkd.in/gMpHQk2w In my 40 years in legal practice in Australia I am not aware of any instance when a court making an interim decision reversed itself in its final decision. For this reason, when for example an interim injunction application to a court succeeds it is typically a signal by the court for the parties to resolve the matter without a final hearing being necessary. Credit: The image for this post is a screenshot from the lead news story today online on ABC News, the state broadcaster in Australia. Source: https://lnkd.in/gQRzT3Ug

Practice and Procedure Act, 2023 sustained by the Supreme Court! By a majority of 10 to 5, the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023 (‘the Act’) is sustained as being in accordance with the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (‘the Constitution’). Sub-section (1) of section 5 of the Act (granting a right of appeal prospectively) is also declared to be in accordance with the Constitution however, sub-section (2) of section 5 of the Act (granting a right of appeal retrospectively) is declared to be ultra vires the Constitution. #PractiseandPeocedureAct #SupremeCourt #QadarlawAssociates.

Practice and Procedure Act, 2023 sustained by the Supreme Court! By a majority of 10 to 5, the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023 (‘the Act’) is sustained as being in accordance with the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (‘the Constitution’). Sub-section (1) of section 5 of the Act (granting a right of appeal prospectively) is also declared to be in accordance with the Constitution however, sub-section (2) of section 5 of the Act (granting a right of appeal retrospectively) is declared to be ultra vires the Constitution. #SCorder #PractiseandProcedureAct2023

The long-awaited decision of the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan ("HSCP"), by a majority of 10-5, has revealed to uphold the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023 and declared to be consistent with the vires of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 ("Constitution"). However, by a majority of 8-7, Section 5(2) (right to appeal retrospectively) of the Act was held to be ultra vires to the Constitution and hence struck down. I personally believe that the proceedings held were inadequate as the actual legal issue that this Act brought was never properly assessed. The outcome, in the form of judgment, is always dependent on how the proceedings were conducted. The main legal preposition should've been whether the provisions of the Act are considered as being within the domain of the Constitution (Constitutional Provisions). Or in other words, whether the Constitution allow supplementary legislation in order to extend the scope of a provision in the Constitution? Awaiting the detailed judgment.

SUPREME COURT SUPERSEDES EACJ The Supreme Court of Kenya has ruled that East Africa Court of Justice does not have jurisdiction to overule its decisions. The judgment, in my view, reflects the Supremacy of the Constitution over regional legislation.The power of self determination is anchored on supremacy of the Constitution which clearly outlines the arms and components of government, making provisions for the Judiciary and system of courts. Constitutionally, EACJ does not feature in the Kenyan system of courts. In my view, the EACJ's jurisdiction should be limited to inter-governmental & regional issues and not appeals from member countries. Litigation must come to an end.

Practice and Procedure Act, 2023 sustained by the Supreme Court! By a majority of 10 to 5, the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023 (‘the Act’) is sustained as being in accordance with the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (‘the Constitution’). Sub-section (1) of section 5 of the Act (granting a right of appeal prospectively) is also declared to be in accordance with the Constitution however, sub-section (2) of section 5 of the Act (granting a right of appeal retrospectively) is declared to be ultra vires the Constitution.

In Case Munir Hussain Bhatti, case (PLD 2011 SC 407 at Paragraph No. 39)   The governance of state organs in Pakistan is based on checks and balances where the powers of each organ are counter-balanced by some other organ of the State. Thus, executive action taken by various administrative and executive functionaries of the State can be called into question, inter-alia, under Articles 199 and 184(3) of the Constitution of Pakistan. such executive action may additionally be subject to parliamentary review and oversight in our parliamentary system governance. Legislative action can also be called into question in Court, inter-alia on the touchstone that it is violative of the Constitution. Likewise, decisions rendered by this Court can be modified or reversed by the legislation (in recognized circumstances) and such legislation may also be retrospective. Thus we see that each organ of the State, be it the judiciary, the executive or the legislature operates under the Constitutional constraints which effectively make these organs of the State limited in their actions.. #Committee #executive #legislative #judiciary #constitutionallimitation #judicialreview #precedent #appointmentofjudges